Player Discussion Rick Nash

[Edge]

I would definitely consider his goal scoring ability between 2003-04 to 2014-15 to be in the elite, upper echelon territory. More or less.

I don't know if he was a guy who necessarily elevated a team like his size and talent dictate he could've, or that he was necessarily as consistent on a game-to-game basis as some of his contemporaries, but the elite talent was def. there.

In a given year, some guys scored more goals, or had strung together more eye-catching seasons in a row, but Nash was pretty regularly finishing in that 30-40 goal range when he was healthy.

The challenge is that it didn't seem be often enough in the right moments, or in a manner that consistently put the team on his back. So the result was that you often had an elite level talent who strangely enough felt like something a little less than elite at times.

 

[True Blue]

Is he a generational goal scorer? I don't think so. I think the word generational gets thrown around too much.

Is he an ELITE scorer of THIS generation? Without question. Objectively.

When you want to answer the question I posed to you, how many players do you think since 2002 have more goals than Nash, we can continue this conversation.

EDIT - And again, I'll caveat that Nash has quite a lot of GP in that timeframe, and that needs to be taken into account. So you let me know when EXTRAPOLATING works for you, and when it doesn't.

Well as that is the debate that you jumped into, what are we even discussing?

Is he an ELITE scorer of THIS generation? Without question. Objectively.

When you want to answer the question I posed to you, how many players do you think since 2002 have more goals than Nash, we can continue this conversation.

Did I miss where this was being discussed? Just curious.

But since you seem intent on making it a discussion, we certainly can talk about it. First however, you still need to define what years "this" generation spans. Am going to ass-u-me that you feel that "THIS" generation starts in 2002. So let's pretend that indeed it does. Has he been an elite goal scorer, all in all? Of course he has. But who is debating this? Why are you insistent on arguing a point NO ONE is arguing?

Though to play devil's advocate, i will say that in all that time he made the top 10 goal scoring list only 3 times. One would have thought that an "elite" goal scorer would have done it more. But whatever. He has 427 goals. Since 2002 he has been elite in that aspect. How is this germane to the conversation since no one is debating this?

When you want to answer the question I posed to you, how many players do you think since 2002 have more goals than Nash, we can continue this conversation.

Who cares? Since I told you that yes, he WAS an elite goal scorer, I do not feel the need to look it up. However, that is not what he IS today. You know, what was what I posted.

EDIT - And again, I'll caveat that Nash has quite a lot of GP in that timeframe, and that needs to be taken into account. So you let me know when EXTRAPOLATING works for you, and when it doesn't.

Who is extrapolating here? Extrapolated steps bring about extrapolated results. Do you deny this? Extrapolated is not quite the same thing as actual. He may have been an elite goal scorer since he came in the league. However, that is not what he is. However, he has let his team down over and over again when his team needed him the most. However, being an elite goal scorer did not magically make him an elite player. However, that may well have been what he was. Which does not change the fact that at this point, he is what he is. A 2nd/3rd line tweener.

 

[will1066]

There are levels between total rebuild and going all in. We've seen it in practice already. Trade Brassard for Zib and a 2nd. Sign Grabner. Trade Stepan and Raanta for 7th overall and ADA. Sign Shattenkirk.

Whether or not they sell players, they are still going to try to compete.

The sentiment here lately at least to me is full-on rebuild. Burn it down and start over. Especially after the Pens loss. I think the feeling around here is that Shatty has been underwhelming even with the hometown discounted contract. Of course, reality is that a big-market team like us will 97% never engage in a total demolition job.

 

[silverfish]

@True Blue this is your original post:

Generational he is far from. VERY far from.

He is a third/second line tweener who, with help can score 20 goals. Good two way player. Nothing spectacular.

This post was in response to @Dactyl 's post about Nash being a generational goal scorer.

If I was to assume that your post was directed at current Rick Nash, I did not make that assumption, as your post suggests that's what you think Rick Nash is, and always has been, as you reference the "Generational" standpoint, which had me assuming, again I guess incorrectly(?), that you were referencing past Nash AND current Nash.

If your belief is that current Nash is a 3/2 tweener who can score 20 goals, then I don't care to debate that. If your belief is that's what Nash has always been, that's where we have beef, and why I came into this thread.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

Lets fatten this turkey up in the next few weeks before the trade deadline.

Butterball Nash.

 

[pblawr]

Would just like to point that Nash leads our team in shots on goal by 40 and has put more pucks on net than McDavid, Bergeron, Crosby, Malkin, and Stamkos while killing penalties and spending limited time on the power play.

Shooting percentage is notoriously fickle and deciding that a 5-time all-star who's still generating 3 shots on goal per game is a bad player because he's had a bad shooting percentage for half a season strikes me as a really silly thing to do. Personally, I agree that it makes sense to sell off older players and rebuild, but I don't think that selling low on one of your best players is a smart way to do it.

 

[LeetchisGod]

Would just like to point that Nash leads our team in shots on goal by 40 and has put more pucks on net than McDavid, Bergeron, Crosby, Malkin, and Stamkos while killing penalties and spending limited time on the power play.

Shooting percentage is notoriously fickle and deciding that a 5-time all-star who's still generating 3 shots on goal per game is a bad player because he's had a bad shooting percentage for half a season strikes me as a really silly thing to do. Personally, I agree that it makes sense to sell off older players and rebuild, but I don't think that selling low on one of your best players is a smart way to do it.

Nash's production has been poor for 2 and half seasons now. That's a lot of bad luck.

 

[LORDE]

Would just like to point that Nash leads our team in shots on goal by 40 and has put more pucks on net than McDavid, Bergeron, Crosby, Malkin, and Stamkos while killing penalties and spending limited time on the power play.

Shooting percentage is notoriously fickle and deciding that a 5-time all-star who's still generating 3 shots on goal per game is a bad player because he's had a bad shooting percentage for half a season strikes me as a really silly thing to do. Personally, I agree that it makes sense to sell off older players and rebuild, but I don't think that selling low on one of your best players is a smart way to do it.

His shooting percentage is where it is because last night was a rare occurrence these days.

The 2nd goal especially... more often than not this season that shot would've been a logo snipe. Last night it was a corner snipe.

Those of us who are perceived to be "Nash-Haters" have wanted to see games like last night from Nash for a years. Can he do it on a fairly consistent basis? Love to see it. Love to.

 

[pblawr]

Nash's production has been poor for 2 and half seasons now. That's a lot of bad luck.

Nash was 30th in the NHL in goals per 60 last year, ahead of Forsberg, Eichel, and Patrick Kane.

 

[LeetchisGod]

Nash was 30th in the NHL in goals per 60 last year, ahead of Forsberg, Eichel, and Patrick Kane.

Sorry, I care more about actual goals than goals per 60. He has 49 goals in his last 172 games. Not good enough.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Sorry, I care more about actual goals than goals per 60. He has 49 goals in his last 172 games. Not good enough.

By that logic, a player scoring 10 goals in 82 games is better than a player who scores 9 goals in 40

 

[LeetchisGod]

By that logic, a player scoring 10 goals in 82 games is better than a player who scores 9 goals in 40

Not true. I have stated how many goals Nash has actually scored compared to his actual games played. His production levels are simply not enough bang for the buck in a salary cap league. Even when he was in his prime, how many important playoff goals did he score? We made the cup finals in spite of him, not because of him.

 

[Thirty One]

Butterball Nash.

Classic comedy.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Not true. I have stated how many goals Nash has actually scored compared to his actual games played. His production levels are simply not enough bang for the buck in a salary cap league. Even when he was in his prime, how many important playoff goals did he score? We made the cup finals in spite of him, not because of him.

Goals/60 basically proves that he scores more than most forwards. 30th in the league last season. That's pretty good.

Nobody is saying he is worth his 7.8m cap hit but that contract is the perfect example of how megotiations work. Teams underpay a bit in the prime years and add more for the later years to compensate.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

Classic comedy.

Thanks Bob Newhart.

 

[Fvital92]

Yeah, he was great last night, please trade him.

 

[Doctyl]

If I was to assume that your post was directed at current Rick Nash, I did not make that assumption, as your post suggests that's what you think Rick Nash is, and always has been, as you reference the "Generational" standpoint, which had me assuming, again I guess incorrectly(?), that you were referencing past Nash AND current Nash.

If your belief is that current Nash is a 3/2 tweener who can score 20 goals, then I don't care to debate that. If your belief is that's what Nash has always been, that's where we have beef, and why I came into this thread.

Did not assume incorrectly

I would say that at this point, as has been the evident case in the last x amount of years, Nash is what he is.

"last x amount of years"

x = 15-16: only Iginla and Ovechkin scored more ES goals
x = 14: only Ovechkin
x = 12-13: only Crosby and Ovechkin
etc.

Those are just goals scored, his goal scoring efficiency is even better than his raw goal numbers.

Since 2007 (x = 11), or post-prime Nash, only Ovechkin, Stamkos, Tarasenko, Kucherov, and Crosby score at a better pace than Nash.

x = 10: just Stamkos
x = 9: Stamkos, Crosby, Tarasenko
x = 7-8: Stamkos, Anthanasiou, Matthews
x = 6: Anthanasiou, Matthews
x = 5: Anthanasiou, Matthews, Tarasenko
x = 4: Nash is 9th
etc.

 

[Samuel Culper III]

Did not assume incorrectly



"last x amount of years"

x = 15-16: only Iginla and Ovechkin scored more ES goals
x = 14: only Ovechkin
x = 12-13: only Crosby and Ovechkin
etc.

Those are just goals scored, his goal scoring efficiency is even better than his raw goal numbers.

Since 2007 (x = 11), or post-prime Nash, only Ovechkin, Stamkos, Tarasenko, Kucherov, and Crosby score at a better pace than Nash.

x = 10: just Stamkos
x = 9: Stamkos, Crosby, Tarasenko
x = 7-8: Stamkos, Anthanasiou, Matthews
x = 6: Anthanasiou, Matthews
x = 5: Anthanasiou, Matthews, Tarasenko
x = 4: Nash is 9th
etc.

What Nash did 4-5+ years ago is impressive, no doubt. He’s had an excellent career between NHL numbers, international play, etc.

Unfortunately what matters now is his goal scoring and point production this year and over the past year or two (only as a reference to see if this season is an outlier or if this is the production that can be expected). Nash declined too sharply, too rapidly and with too much term remaining on his lofty cap hit. His last few years have simply made his contract a very unattractive anchor around his neck.

 

[Doctyl]

What Nash did 4-5+ years ago is impressive, no doubt. He’s had an excellent career between NHL numbers, international play, etc.

Unfortunately what matters now is his goal scoring and point production this year and over the past year or two (only as a reference to see if this season is an outlier or if this is the production that can be expected). Nash declined too sharply, too rapidly and with too much term remaining on his lofty cap hit. His last few years have simply made his contract a very unattractive anchor around his neck.

Thats fine. Nash still drives play, his finishing ability has dried up. Either hes snakebitten or is declining. He is still one of our best players at generating offense. He is absolutely not worth 7.8 a year at this stage of his career. Re-signing him under 4 per shouldnt be out of the question though, just as trading him shouldnt be.

Again its fine to say Nash isnt dominant like he used to be. Its absolutely not fine to pretend hes a career 20 goal scorer who has never been worth his contract.

 

[Samuel Culper III]

I haven’t personally seen or perceived anyone trying to make Nash out to be a career 20 goal scorer. Not saying no one has; I don’t read every single post on here, but I tend to think people just don’t care about what he used to be. I don’t think people want Nash back, even at 4M because they see how he has declined so far and wonder how much longer he will continue to even be a 25 goal scorer. I think even more people are just ready to move in a new direction. Nash is hardly irreplaceable even at 4M. Let someone else sign him.

 

[LeetchisGod]

Thats fine. Nash still drives play, his finishing ability has dried up. Either hes snakebitten or is declining. He is still one of our best players at generating offense. He is absolutely not worth 7.8 a year at this stage of his career. Re-signing him under 4 per shouldnt be out of the question though, just as trading him shouldnt be.

Again its fine to say Nash isnt dominant like he used to be. Its absolutely not fine to pretend hes a career 20 goal scorer who has never been worth his contract.

He used to be an elite regular season goal scorer. He is no longer. He has only scored 14 goals in 73 playoff games as a Ranger. That is really disappointing for a player of his pedigree and ability.

 

[Doctyl]

He used to be an elite regular season goal scorer. He is no longer. He has only scored 14 goals in 73 playoff games as a Ranger. That is really disappointing for a player of his pedigree and ability.

Only Stepan and Brassard have more playoff points over Nash's tenure. Only Brassard has more ES points. Only Stepan and Brassard have more ES goals. All situations? Just add Kreider to that short list. Only Brass and Taco score at a better rate at ES.

If you want to call out Nash for his lack of production in the playoffs, call out everyone sans Brassard. Why doesnt Zuccarello get ripped for producing at a worse pace than Nash? Kreider gets worshipped and Nash outpaces him. Beaves and MSL get remembered as clutch in the playoffs, you know who outpaced their production? Rick Nash. How bout Kevin Hayes's 7 points in 34 games?

Literally only Brassard performed better than Nash across the board. Thats it.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

As I've been saying for a while, it is not at all weird how people defend Rick Nash.



RIP 2014

Hopefully we get a good return for him.

 

[Samuel Culper III]

Probably because you could have two Zucc’s for Nash’s cap hit.

 

[Doctyl]

As I've been saying for a while, it is not at all weird how people defend Rick Nash.



RIP 2014

Hopefully we get a good return for him.

Dont you have a coach to defend?